Get the Most Important EcoNews Right in Your Inbox

Follow EcoWatch

Moving ahead rapidly with plans to approve several new liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals would require “a rapid increase in fracking in the United States without credible science” and “could potentially cause undue harm to many Americans,” according to 107 experts who signed on to a petition sent last week to the White House.

Signed by top U.S. medical professionals, researchers, and other scientists, the petition reads in part:

There is a growing body of evidence that unconventional natural gas extraction from shale (also known as “fracking”) may be associated with adverse health risks through exposure to polluted air, water and soil. Public health researchers and medical professionals question the continuation of current levels of fracking without a full scientific understanding of the health implications. The opening of LNG export facilities would serve to accelerate fracking in the United States in absence of sound scientific assessment, placing policy before health.

“The question here is very simple: Why would the United States dramatically increase the use of an energy extraction method without first ensuring that the trade-off is not the health of Americans in exchange for the energy demands of foreign nations? Health professionals are coming together today to urge the White House to make sure that we have the facts prior to making this decision,” said Seth B. Shonkoff, PhD, MPH, executive director, Physicians, Scientists & Engineers for Healthy Energy (PSE) and environmental researcher, University of California, Berkeley. “The only prudent thing to do here is to conduct the needed research first.”

“Researchers are finding measurable levels of pollutants from this industry in air and water that are associated with the risk of illness,” said Adam Law, MD, physician, Cayuga Medical Center, Ithaca, NY and Physicians, Scientists & Engineers for Healthy Energy. “The first studies to describe this are entering the scientific literature and public health researchers are embarking on multiple approaches to study the associated adverse health effects.”

“Natural gas has been in these shale formations for millions of years; it isn’t going anywhere and will be around for future generations,” said Madelon L. Finkel, PhD, professor of clinical public health, and director of the Office of Global Health Education, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York City. “Society especially owes it to those living in areas with both active and planned drilling to study the potential for harm (to the environment and to human and animal health) and to act to reduce those factors that are shown to increase the risk of disease and even death.”

“The current unconventional oil and gas drilling process using High Volume Horizontal Hydro-Fracturing is a much more intensive industrial activity than conventional drilling, which was the norm until about 10 years ago,” said Louis W. Allstadt, former executive vice president, Mobil Oil Corporation, Cooperstown, NY. “It requires far greater volumes of water and chemicals, as well as disposal of much larger volumes of toxic flow-back fluids. We need to fully study and understand the health effects of the significantly greater volumes of toxic materials that must be handled and disposed of with this process.”

The full text of the PSE petition reads as follows:

“We the undersigned medical and scientific professionals urge the Obama Administration to put a hold on moving forward on the construction of new liquefied natural gas terminals for the large-scale exportation of shale gas to foreign nations. Our concern is that the Administration has not fully examined the potential for harm to health and the environment that could result.

There is a growing body of evidence that unconventional natural gas extraction from shale (also known as ‘fracking’) may be associated with adverse health risks through exposure to polluted air, water, and soil.

Public health researchers and medical professionals question the continuation of current levels of fracking without a full scientific understanding of the health implications. The opening of LNG export facilities would serve to accelerate fracking in the United States in absence of sound scientific assessment, placing policy before health.

As the White House and the Department of Energy contemplate exporting LNG to accommodate international demand for energy, the need for a deliberative process based on sound science is all the more important. We assert that a guiding ethical principle for public policy on fracking should parallel that used by physicians: ‘First, do not harm.’

There is a need for much more scientific and epidemiologic information about the potential for harm from fracking. To facilitate a rapid increase in fracking in the United States without credible science is irresponsible and could potentially cause undue harm to many Americans.

Without well-designed scientific studies, we will not know the extent of potential harm from fracking. We strongly urge the Administration to err on the side of caution as it contemplates national policy regarding the exportation of shale gas.

The health professionals below sign as individuals and do not necessarily represent the views of their employer.”

Comments

Paul Purcell

Sign this petition! 37,000 American jobs are at risk by the uncertainty of whether or not the Production Tax Credit will be extended.. The dirty energy industries like coal, gas, oil and nuclear all recieve much more in the line of subsidies and tax credits then all the clean energy projects combined! Clean energy means investing in America! Supporting the American economy, American energy security, American national security and the health of Americans!

Fossil fuel subsidies are numerous and complex. The average informed citizen does not have a clue how these dirty industries get…
preferential treatment above clean renewable energies such as wind, solar, wave and biofuel. Included in this article is a link to a report outlining the business tactic the fossil fuel industry employs to entrench and hide their far too generous subsidies. Clean renewable energy projects do not get anywhere near the support these dirty energy projects do. We need to be supporting our clean energy efforts!

The Military using biofuels would be a great step forward for the American economy and national security by fostering energy independence. This bill stinks of favoritism for big oil.. Lose it!
Sign the petition!http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/gop_biofuels/

Err on the side of caution used to be the way, no we are reactive instead of proactive. That is why the industry is freight training their way across the country and then will try and get some grandfather clause to prevent them from protecting our health on existing wells. Any one who doubts the effects need only go stay at a well for about a week, like a nearby resident does, and they will quickly realize it is all bad.

http://www.bakkendispatch.com/ bakkendispatch

I agree, Dirk. The whole “energy independence” or “drill baby drill” movement is pushing policies that have very little basis in reality or “err on the side of caution.” I think this attitude will prove to be short lived when reality sets in and we’re forced to focus on conservation and alternatives. I hope so anyway.

greenback

I’m concerned that the environmental movement has been hijacked by hypocrites. Fracking is a new technology making it cleaner and safer to to extract gas from underground. Of course it is still not perfect, but nothing ever will be. Are people seriously interested in suppressing this advanced technology and return to the archaic and filthy technology? Also, as far as the most hazardous thing to be concerned about with a clean environment is the fact that the WAR is the #1 contributing factor of pollution on a global scale. Stopping the WAR would do a million times more good for the environment than any other faux green cause. Why are some people disconnected in thinking that drilling for gas and oil in other people’s countries is cleaner as if pollution needs a passport to travel – let alone incorporating the amount of fuel the Military uses on a daily basis; they use more fuel than the entire US population on a daily basis.

DeAnna Rieber

Now is the moment to leave a legacy of healthy environmental decision making or a legacy of decisions that will destroy the planet and leave millions of American homes at risk. Seems like a simple choice to me…not sure why we would even consider policies that have the potential to be so damaging.

http://www.uwspsychiatrist.com E.Frischauf

Conservation of energy and innovative uses trump poisoning ourselves and the web of life we depend on. Why do we run from using our brain resources in a state filled with them and why can’t we be leaders instead of followers?

siresearch seo

Thank you for sharing valuable information. Nice post. I enjoyed reading this post. The whole blog is very nice found some good stuff and good information here Thanks..Also visit my page pharmacological recruitment .